Park and Ride

26th January 2016 at 1:30PM, Edit: 26th January 2016 at 1:36PM by Serenity

To me it's worst than having no car park there. What's the point. Here's someone who wants to park up and not use his car to pollute the main road but he's not allowed to park there and use a nearly empty car park just because he's not using the bus service.

Perhaps it might be a good idea if the bus company introduced parking fees for those drivers who want to use the car park only. Surely any revenue is better than none. Which is what seems to be happening judging from how many cars seemed to be using it daily.

but it uses busses, not trains. its a terrible white elephant thought up by council staff, doomed to fail as most have pointed out back in the day. the reason for reviving this thread js that I use the facility every work day. I park, I get my bike out the boot and ride to work. on Friday, I was stopped to be advise I can't park and ride if I don't get the bus. he said my car reg would be noted (golly). this would not be so weird if I were taking a commuters space but at 8:45 there were 12 cars in the car park & most were bus drivers'.

As Jenny has pointed out, the facility has nothing to do with Stockport Council; their only involvement was to deal with the planning application for it and collect the business rates it generates.

May I suggest that if you owned a piece of land and someone came along, parked their car on it and took off on a bike without so much as a by-your-leave, you would object. The site belongs to the bus company and if you're not using the bus, you're trespassing!

The reason why I thought entitled to use the car park was that I was doing exactly what was intended as a park & ride on publically owned land. However, if it's privately owned, fair enough.

I certainly shouldn't believe all I read on the interwebs! I took it from this thread http://www.civicr.com/a/hazel-grove/forum/hazel-grove-park-and-ride-t3250-p1.html that it was a council process with some success being claimed by cllr Kevin Hogg.

According to our MP (councillor at the time and appeared to have looked up the information) "The land earmarked for the park and ride is publicly owned. The Gordon Ford site is owned by a company, I think, on behalf of Tescos."

I'm surprised a private company would go ahead with something without properly researching customer behaviour, it's fairly clear from the discussions that the issues were flagged to the researcher early on.

On the plus side, Stagecoach will not just sit on it and will put the land to good use, either residential or industrial, they will not want the cost of servicing such an ill-thought out idea.

26th January 2016 at 4:00PM, Edit: 26th January 2016 at 4:03PM by Expert

The clue is in the name "Park AND Ride". Private companies are owned by "shareholders" and its entirely for them to decide how it's operated and whether it's worthwhile keeping it.

Personally, I find it quite convenient to be able to park up and get on a bus without having to worry about where to park or how long I've been there. You should try it sometime, perhaps when its not fit for cycling! Irrespective of whether its's used or not, would you rather have the mess and dereliction which preceded it?

The clue is in the name "Park AND Ride". Private companies are owned by "shareholders" and its entirely for them to decide how it's operated and whether it's worthwhile keeping it.

Personally, I find it quite convenient to be able to park up and get on a bus without having to worry about where to park or how long I've been there. You should try it sometime, perhaps when its not fit for cycling! Irrespective of whether its's used or not, would you rather have the mess and dereliction which preceded it?

The clue maybe in the name and I was riding, just not a bus. I agree, if it's privately owned, it's down to them to make the most profitable / valuable use of the land. I simply can't see this delivering profit / value, especially if they are paying rates on that car park.

I simply was not aware that this was entirely the brainchild of stagecoach and given the discussion in the link (above) with Councillors claiming it to be a great plan and others confirming it was publically owned land (or at least some of it), I think it was a fair mistake to make.

I suspect, Stagecoach will see the folly soon enough and sell most to developers which would be sensible.

To me it's worst than having no car park there. What's the point. Here's someone who wants to park up and not use his car to pollute the main road but he's not allowed to park there and use a nearly empty car park just because he's not using the bus service.

Perhaps it might be a good idea if the bus company introduced parking fees for those drivers who want to use the car park only. Surely any revenue is better than none. Which is what seems to be happening judging from how many cars seemed to be using it daily.

I don;t think I'd use it if there were a fee for parking, I just park in the street and ride in fro there so I'm still relieving the A6 of a car but it would be nicer if I could just use the (scarcely used) car park rather than on-street parking.